[deleted]

Has this ever been fully resolved?

The Spanish said it was an accident (coal bunker next to magazine caused the explosion)

Sampson Board's Inquiry in 1898 said it was a mine

Vreeland Board in 1911 said it was an external explosion, but different from what the Sampson Board described

Rickover Investigation in 1974 concluded the explosion was caused internally

A 1998 National Geographic investigation was unconclusive

A 2002 History channel investigation seemed to agree with the Spanish conclusion

How thorough were any of these investigations? Was it just an accident that the US capitalized on to go to war? Or was it really a Spanish attack? Did aliens blow it up? Or do we just not know?

I remember reading that early on in the U.S. election process, the Vice President was the losing party's presidential candidate. The thought process was that it would bring more moderate political views into the government, rather than leaning heavily one side or the other. But now, presidential candidates nominate their own vice presidential candidates, almost entirely from their party. When did this change occur? What were the reason behind the switch? What effects did it have on American politics?

The Dutch, Portuguese, Spanish, French, British.

Preferably something comparative, but falling that, I would not mind individual titles.

Thanks.

Was it even possible to pry apart sleepers or metal from the rails? for simple metal/lumber theft or intentional train derailment.

I just finished writing notes for an essay, and though "if I were in ancient Greece, and someone centuries into the future saw my notes, how'd they know I was really bad a spelling?"

I'd imagine it would be important for discovering an ancient language.

I've read on wiki and even watched that BBC documentary ''History of Scotland'' and nobody pays any attention to this. It looks like Scots were Celtic people, and all of a sudden everyone is called Thomas, John or Alexander and are speaking English.

You could earn a degree on the classifications and attributes of different sailing ships. Sloops, frigates, ships of the line, fifth rates, sixth rates, etc, etc.

What I want to now is, is there a particular type of vessel that pirates were more likely to use? How did they get their hands on them? Was speed more in their interest than strength? What ships were used by the most successful/infamous pirates?

Thanks for your help.

And to a latter extent why did it unify under Prussia?

[deleted]

I've read and seen that European plate armor was just fantastic for its time - nearly impenetrable to swords and even able to deflect bullets from most contemporary firearms in the late medieval period. All without sacrificing much, if anything, in weight or mobility compared to other kinds of armor.

So why did places like the Ottoman Empire and Russia, where they had regular contact with plate-armored Europeans, keep using mail, brigandine, and lamellar? What advantages did they offer?

Wasn't sure where would be the best place to ask this but I was told this sub would be ok.

History is something I love reading and knowing a lot and I think archaeology would be a god career. But I have questions.

What is the day-to-day life like for an archaeologist? How often do you travel compared to studying stuff. Do you get to choose what parts of history you want to study and work on? Can I get a job right away after getting a degree and what doing what, what is entry level like? How often do you travel and do you gotta wait a while to go on archaeological digs or is that right away? I'm almost 25, is this a career that favors younger students breaking in or would I be welcomed more starting around thirty? What are the ratio of how many women are involved in the classroom and who are in this field of work?

I always hear about how many Nazis fled to Argentina after WWII but I've never understood why they chose Argentina. Anyone able to enlighten me?

I'm trying to figure out how accurate it is but the only thread from this subreddit that discusses it is 4 years old and I believe I remember a warning from (I believe) a moderator against any answers from before 2013 or so. Can anyone help?

Edit: Also, what was the reason.

If not, why not?

I'm personally inclined to say no, mostly because every involved party from peasantry to bourgeoisie to nobility to monarchy showed a certain sense of inconsistency and almost ambivalence. My opinions I admit are rather unoriginal, almost mirroring the work of William Doyle on the topic but I've been trying to improve my justification and maybe better specify my reasoning in the process. I was trying to create a better theory involving cahiers, intellectual culture, or the general flow of information but have so far been unsuccessful. Any thoughts?

In particular I'm responding to the comedic treatment of adultry in The Millers Tale, which has essentially no sympathy for the cucukolded husband. Also, the portrayal of Tristram and La Beale Isoud in Le Morte d'Arthur was surprising--she is married to King Mark and is lovers with Tristram and yet the only thing Tristram seems to get condemned for is leaving her to marry another woman. And in contrast to what I've traditionally heard about "courtly love" they are explicitly having sex. Isoud herself is treated totally sympathetically. Another section in that same part of the story has a magic cup that spills when any "faithless" woman drinks from it that only a handful out of a hundred women successfully drink from.

In the 1400-1600s era bookended by these works, was adultery really so ubiquitous? Was it a serious moral/criminal offense in reality or the commonplace part of daily life these works seem to suggest?

Was the United States seen as a future major player or just another first world country.

So I'm watching Crossbones (yes for John Malkovich!) and a percentage of the pirates are wearing insane make-up. Not just eyeliner or what have you, but one has his face painted like a skeleton, another has like this monster of the lagoon thing going on. So I guess my question is just that, was this common practice in the true pirate companies or a tv drama only thing?

I was watching The Office and there's a scene where Dwight says that birthdays are a depression-era invention, so it got me wondering

What's the oldest fart joke we have on record?

Aryans are blond-haired, blue-eyed people and Hitler had some pretty dark hair. Did he think he was just better, like he didn't really need to fulfill those standards?

Especially when compared to the rest of the leaders of the Eastern Bloc?